Madhya Pradesh High Court
Smt. Asha Yadav vs Smt. Jayshree Kiyawat on 24 September, 2021
Author: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
Bench: Gurpal Singh Ahluwalia
1
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
Conc No.1667/2021
(SMT. ASHA YADAV VS. SMT. JAYSHREE KIYAWAT & ANR.)
Gwalior, Dated : 24/09/2021
Shri Pawan Singh Raghuwanshi, learned counsel for the
applicant.
This contempt petition under Sections 10 and 12 of the
Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 has been filed complaining non-
compliance of order dated 05/10/2016 passed in W.P. No.7085/2016,
by which the applicant was given liberty to make a fresh
representation within a period of fifteen days from the date of order
with a direction to respondents to decide the representation within a
period of two months.
It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that the applicant had given a representation on 17/10/2016 and thereafter, a notice through advocate was given on 29/06/2021, however, the respondents have not decided the representation.
Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. By order dated 05/10/2016 the writ petition filed by the applicant, which was registered as W.P. No.7085/2016 was disposed of with the following observations:-
"This petition is disposed of with a direction that in case the petitioner makes a fresh representation within 15 days from today along with certified copy of the order being passed today and copy of the Writ Petition, then the authority shall take a decision on such representation through a speaking order within a further period of two months."2
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH Conc No.1667/2021 (SMT. ASHA YADAV VS. SMT. JAYSHREE KIYAWAT & ANR.) It is the case of the applicant that she had made a representation on 17/10/2016 and her representation has not been decided even after five years.
Although, no limitation is provided for initiating proceedings under Article 215 of the Constitution of India, but the contempt petition is to be filed within a reasonable period. The direction to the respondents was to decide the representation within a period of two months from the date of filing of the representation. It is the case of the applicant that the representation was made on 17/10/2016, therefore, it is clear that the representation was to be decided latest by 16/12/2016, whereas this contempt petition has been filed after more than four and half years. Much water must have flown under the bridge. No useful purpose would be served by issuing notice to the respondents.
Accordingly, this contempt petition is dismissed on the ground of delay and latches.
(G.S. Ahluwalia) Judge Arun* ARUN KUMAR MISHRA 2021.09.24 17:48:40 +05'30'